1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2.(a)

. On the counterclaim filed in the trial.

1. Judgment on the main lawsuit

A. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including a serial number, hereinafter the same shall apply) and all pleadings as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff transferred KRW 5 million to the deposit account in the defendant's name on November 28, 2006, and the plaintiff sent the defendant a certificate of content that he/she would pay the money borrowed from the plaintiff on July 8, 2014.

According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant borrowed the above five million won from the Plaintiff. As such, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the Plaintiff damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from August 28, 2014 to the day of complete payment, as claimed by the Plaintiff, on the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, as the payment date for the above five million won and the subsequent payment date.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant asserted that the Defendant used the Defendant’s private village C’s deposit account in the name of the Defendant, but only transferred KRW 5 million to the said deposit account, which was the Plaintiff’s private village C, and that the Defendant did not borrow KRW 5 million from the Plaintiff.

However, as shown in the above argument by the defendant, the witness D's testimony is difficult to believe in light of the relationship between the defendant and the witness, etc., and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and as seen earlier, it is recognized that the plaintiff lent to the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant's argument is without merit.

2. Judgment on the counterclaim

A. The Defendant asserts that the Defendant lent KRW 3 million to the Plaintiff, which determined the cause of the claim.

According to the purport of the entries and arguments in subparagraph 1 of this Article, the defendant may recognize the fact that the defendant remitted the plaintiff a total of KRW 1 million on August 17, 2006, KRW 500,000 on November 6, 2006, KRW 160,000 on December 8, 2008, KRW 160,000 on March 2, 2009, KRW 75,000 on March 31, 2009, KRW 156,00 on May 3, 2009, and KRW 2,147,000 on May 156, 200 on May 12, 209.

In addition, the defendant asserts that the plaintiff has lent cash from time to time, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it.

If so,